How are people like this getting elected?

[mysticjbyrd]

You offer no proof that he is wrong, only a statistical claim that if religions differ they can't all be right when in fact, if the differences are irrelevant, many many of them may in fact be right. You began with the notion that religious beliefs are preposterous and circled right back to that assumption. Your conclusion is as faith based as his is. Sadly, in your terms that just makes you another dumb gullible twat it would seem.

"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

Hitchens

 

[MongGrel]

No idea what Ellison thinks but the God of popcorn is Mogogo.

I do not think Ellison knows what he thinks half the time, he's was always odd like that.

I'll take your word on it about the popcorn god.

 

[buckshot24]

So you are saying your bullshit religion is true, and the infinite other religions, both past and future, are wrong.

I'm saying your reasoning here is ridiculously idiotic.

But you offer no proof, because no proof exists...

I haven't offered any proof because I haven't offered any proof.

Your bullshit religion is no better than Islam, Raelism, Scientology, or anything else. All delusions from manipulative douchebags taking advantage of dumb gullible twats, like yourself.

How does this make genetic copying errors any more capable of producing your brain? Provide the evidence please. Pretty ironic that you complain to me about not providing any evidence and don't provide any yourself.

Though to be fair, your parents are to blame. They are the ones that indoctrinated you with bullshit, before you were intelligent enough to fight back.

My parents never took me to any church. Are there any other baseless assertions you'd like to throw out there?

The irony is you think I am the arrogant one, lol! You are just as much of an atheist as I am, but I got one magical skydaddy further.

Maybe you have voices in your head just like Cerpin does and I am not an atheist in any sense of the word.


PROVIDE THE EVIDENCE!

 

[buckshot24]

"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

Hitchens

I agree and since you provide zero justification for your ridiculous argument I can flush it with lunch, where it belongs.

1. There really isn't a big collection of religions to ever exist let alone enough to assert that infinity has any relevance to the discussion.
2. Wrong answers don't have any effect whatsoever on the right answers.
3. Your argument is completely circular.
4. You are a Bernie Sanders supporter. ()

 

[DrDoug]

I agree and since you provide zero justification for your ridiculous argument I can flush it with lunch, where it belongs.

1. There really isn't a big collection of religions to ever exist let alone enough to assert that infinity has any relevance to the discussion.
2. Wrong answers don't have any effect whatsoever on the right answers.
3. Your argument is completely circular.
4. You are a Bernie Sanders supporter. ()

I know, he's got me on ignore but I thought it fitting...

 

[mysticjbyrd]

Though I'm loathe to appear to support BS24, your argument is total nonsense. First, your initial assertion that there have been infinite religions is wildly, indisputably wrong. The actual number is quite finite, and likely not all that big.

Moreover, regardless of how many religions there have been, it is a non sequitur to claim this means they're all invalid. It just isn't a valid argument. You are effectively arguing that something being improbable makes it false (which, ironically, is the same argument BS24 uses against evolution). That is wrong. For example, there are about 300 million Powerball combinations, yet there is always one that is right for any given drawing. The same could be true for religion. I personally don't believe it is, but that's not something that can be proven mathematically.

It is near infinite.

You are excluding too many religions. You have to include every single religion past, present, and future. What's more, you need to include very very small religions, even those constructed and held to be true by only one person. Every single nut that thought he was talking to god is a prophet of his own religion! He might not be able to recruit others, but that doesn't matter.

You would also need to include the religions of alien civilizations. past, present, and future.

My argument isn't that they are all wrong. The religious zealots are the one claiming their religion is the only correct one. However, given all the religions, past, present, and future the probability you are born into the correct religion is zero. I am merely showing how illogical their claim truly is.

Even, if you wanted to narrow the scope down to a few thousand, that's still 1/thousands of odds. Then, even if you picked the correct deity, what are the odds anything you know about him are true? Religions constantly segment from one another, because they believe different things.

What if you picked the right god, but he was powerless to influence things on this realm, and there was no afterlife. You wouldn't be any better off than anyone else. yet you would have wasted years praying to him.


"Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then He is not omnipotent. Is He able, but not willing? Then He is malevolent. Is He both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is He neither able nor willing? Then why call Him God?"

Epicurus

 

[Bowfinger]

It is near infinite. ...

No, it is not. Not at all. You seem to think "infinite" and "lots" mean the same thing. They do not.

You would also need to include the religions of alien civilizations. past, present, and future. ...

The goalposts, they be moving. You said "mankind". Regardless, even if we expand your argument to include all "religions" invented by any species on any planet, your argument remains fallacious. Improbable things happen.

 

[BxgJ]

Somebody else asked for evidence/proof. My bad. I won't answer your question of when. I don't have any burden to prove anything to you. I'm asking questions about Darwinist dogma.

Worried your YEC beliefs won't stand up to scrutiny here?

 

[buckshot24]

Though I'm loathe to appear to support BS24

Does anybody else see the problem with this?

 

[buckshot24]

It is near infinite.

This shows that you have no idea what infinity actually is. You can never be "near infinite", just really large. Nothing is "near infinite".

You are excluding too many religions. You have to include every single religion past, present, and future.

Why? That's right you asserted, without evidence, that all religious ideas are just as equally likely as any other. What were you saying about asserting something without evidence?

What's more, you need to include very very small religions, even those constructed and held to be true by only one person.

So some guy has these thoughts but only this guy and these thoughts are just as likely true as any other? WHY?

Every single nut that thought he was talking to god is a prophet of his own religion! He might not be able to recruit others, but that doesn't matter.

So a god would go to the trouble of making the universe or planet or whatever and only talk to some nut in an asylum? That is just as likely as any other religious thought? C'mon.

Justify your assumption that any religious thought is just as likely as any other or take a hike. Provide some evidence and quit assuming things.

You would also need to include the religions of alien civilizations. past, present, and future.

Please provide some evidence that these civilizations exist and provide evidence that they have constructed religions.

My argument isn't that they are all wrong.

Of course that is your argument. You said my religion is 0% likely true and it is just as likely as all others. Therefore, according to your reasoning, all religions are 0% likely, if they are all 0% likely then they must all be wrong.

I am merely showing how illogical their claim truly is.

Except none of your assumptions have been demonstrated to be true. Other than that, great argument!

Now, do you have any actual evidence that mutation and selection can build organs like brains?

 

[buckshot24]

Worried your YEC beliefs won't stand up to scrutiny here?

I'm not worried about anything other than you people demonstrating that mutation and selection can actually do what you believe it can do.

Do you have any actual evidence that it can or do you have blind faith?

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

I'm not worried about anything other than you people demonstrating that mutation and selection can actually do what you believe it can do.

I'm curious what -- if any -- degree(s) of evolution you accept.

Are humans and other great apes (chimp, gorilla, orangutan) related by a common anscestor?

Are humans and other mammals (dog, cow, whale) related by a common anscestor?

Are humans and non-mammals (turtles, salmon, koalas) related by a common anscestor?

Are humans and plants/fungus related by a common anscestor?

Of course, we all know that he's pretending to "ignore" me but if anyone would care to quote me so he's even without that joke of an excuse I'd be much obliged.

Do you have any actual evidence that it can or do you have blind faith?

You've seen the evidence, and it's overwhelming persuasiveness is the very reason evolution is the basis for all of modern biology.

Here's a fun exercise. Google "evolutionary biology curriculum" and scroll through links to all the universities with central programs based on what buckwheat here calls a "fairy tale." Consider that any single person who could convincingly demonstrate that evolution was a false theory would easily attain recognition that would rival and conceivably exceed that of Einstein's. It's not like there isn't any incentive to overturn evolution if one could only supply convincing evidence.

Curious, no? How come this hasn't been done, buckwheat?

 

[DrDoug]

Worried your YEC beliefs won't stand up to scrutiny here?

I gotta hand it to the Christian goat roper... he's still roping them in...lol! He has made it clear that he isn't here to prove anything, he's here to point out how wrong you are, no matter the evidence presented. Why? Because he isn't here to admit defeat, he's here to troll the fuck out of people.

IOW, he's winning this thread because that's all he's here for...lol!

 

[mysticjbyrd]

No, it is not. Not at all. You seem to think "infinite" and "lots" mean the same thing. They do not.



The goalposts, they be moving. You said "mankind". Regardless, even if we expand your argument to include all "religions" invented by any species on any planet, your argument remains fallacious. Improbable things happen.

No, I know what infinite means. It's more concise to use 'near infinite', and assume the intended meaning is obvious, but you want to argue semantics.

Mankind... Aliens... Now you are just arguing semantics again.

Improbable things happen?! No, shit sherlock! Sure one person in a quadrillion could be right, but so what? Everyone else lost! I am saying the probability that one faith is the winner is so low that it's not worth playing!

It's like buying a lottery ticket! It's a fools errand! You might as well take your money outside and burn it.

Furthermore, as I said before, even if you want to drastically narrow the scope, it doesn't even matter! The point still stands! A particular faith is nothing more than one ticket in a huge religious lottery!

 

[Paratus]

I'm curious what -- if any -- degree(s) of evolution you accept.

Are humans and other great apes (chimp, gorilla, orangutan) related by a common anscestor?

Are humans and other mammals (dog, cow, whale) related by a common anscestor?

Are humans and non-mammals (turtles, salmon, koalas) related by a common anscestor?

Are humans and plants/fungus related by a common anscestor?

Of course, we all know that he's pretending to "ignore" me but if anyone would care to quote me so he's even without that joke of an excuse I'd be much obliged.


You've seen the evidence, and it's overwhelming persuasiveness is the very reason evolution is the basis for all of modern biology.

Here's a fun exercise. Google "evolutionary biology curriculum" and scroll through links to all the universities with central programs based on what buckwheat here calls a "fairy tale." Consider that any single person who could convincingly demonstrate that evolution was a false theory would easily attain recognition that would rival and conceivably exceed that of Einstein's. It's not like there isn't any incentive to overturn evolution if one could only supply convincing evidence.

Curious, no? How come this hasn't been done, buckwheat?

I'm curious about this as well. So I'll quote you.

 

[buckshot24]

Furthermore, as I said before, even if you want to drastically narrow the scope, it doesn't even matter! The point still stands! A particular faith is nothing more than one ticket in a huge religious lottery!

So you go from 0 to an infinitely larger probability.

But you've not established that all religious claims are just as likely as any other.

 

[mysticjbyrd]

So you go from 0 to an infinitely larger probability.

But you've not established that all religious claims are just as likely as any other.

0+infinitesimally small constant =/= infinitely larger. It's still basically zero.

Either way you want to slice it, you aren't likely to win the faith lottery.


Ohh, I would love to see this... Prove your faith is better!

 

[buckshot24]

I'm curious about this as well. So I'll quote you.

Can you demonstrate that genetic copying errors and selection can turn self replicating molecules into people and pine trees?

 

[Paratus]

Can you demonstrate that genetic copying errors and selection can turn self replicating molecules into people and pine trees?

Well no because people and pine trees evolved not only though natural selection and mututation but also through combinations of traits being passed down through sexual reproduction.

Without sexual reproduction I couldn't explain all of it. Sorry.

 

[buckshot24]

0+infinitesimally small constant =/= infinitely larger

That isn't how you would figure that, but that is par for the course I suppose. But you used the same math to tell me my faith had 0 probability. I think you should take a nap.

Either way you want to slice it, you aren't likely to win the faith lottery.

There is no "faith lottery", you've invented it in your mind.

Ohh, I would love to see this... Prove your faith is better!

So you assert things and I'm supposed to disprove them? Why don't you do your own work for a change?

 

[buckshot24]

Well no because people and pine trees evolved not only though natural selection and mututation but also through combinations of traits being passed down through sexual reproduction.

Without sexual reproduction I couldn't explain all of it. Sorry.

But where did those traits come from?

I'll make it simple for you. Can you demonstrate that genetic copying errors and selection can turn self replicating molecules into sexually replicating organisms? And how about the formation of meiosis itself?

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Can you demonstrate that genetic copying errors and selection can turn self replicating molecules into people and pine trees?

Yes. Can you answer straightforward questions?

 

[Moonbeam]

But where did those traits come from?

I'll make it simple for you. Can you demonstrate that genetic copying errors and selection can turn self replicating molecules into sexually replicating organisms?

This is easy for anybody who has an open scientific mind. It's impossible for you, however, because you ask this question precisely because you have trained yourself not to be able to see the answer so it will always be a question for you, just as you wish it to be. You have a prior commitment to a religious truth that outweighs normal objectivity. You are like a blind person who says if sight is a reality make me see as the only option to prove vision.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Yes. Can you answer straightforward questions?

Looks like that's a no.

Is it any wonder that Conservative Christians are such a joke?

 

[JD50]